Q. Did you learn at the time, you personally, Dr. Ruff, how the people came to the concentration camp. Whether it was by police order, or what facts or orders assigned people to the concentration camps?
A It was known at that time, as I say, that there were criminals in the concentration camps, and it was also known that these were so-called " Sicherheitsverwahrte," people, under security custody, but there were also criminals who had not yet paid the penalty which was dictated by the Court.
These criminals, the "Sicherheitsverwahrten" and part of the prisoners and penitentiary inmates, as we know from a newspaper report, had been transferred to the concentration camps at the beginning of the war. As far as I can recall the newspaper said that they would be used for work in the war effort. Hew political prisoners got into a concentration camp was net known to me in detail. It was unknown to many people at that time, whether it was merely on the basis of a police order or decision of the court, or both, that was not clear, and as far as I can see things now, there were probably various ways which these people came into the concentration camps.
Q Dr. Ruff, a little while ago you said that there were professional criminals in Dachau and then you said that you were told that they were "Sicherheitsverwahrte-Verbrecher", do you know what that term meant, what does it mean to you professional criminals and "Sicherheitsverwahrte-Verbrecher"?
A In broad outline it was no doubt known that every one know? what professional criminals meant and also what "Sicherheitsverwahrte" meant, then, and now I understand by professional criminals, that these criminals who have been repeatedly convicted, who have served several sentences, and now in their last conviction are given a certain term to serve and so called " Sicherheitsverwahrung" is pronounced. Under this term I understood that these people, after serving their sentences proper, are not freed but remain under supervision, since the Court does not feel that it can take the responsibility of releasing these professional criminals into society.
Q And until you had this talk with the SS officer and the Commandant at Dachau, at this time, did you yourself see the prisoners in Dachau, and if so, what clothing did they wear and what insignia?
A When we visited the camp, we saw very few prisoners, only individual ones. We were told that the prisoners were working. The concentration camp Dachau has a large bread factory, a porcelain factory a big herb garden for medical herbs and spices, and also big agricultural concerns, and more or less all inmates of the camp were used for work in these various enterprises. The prisoners whom we saw in the camp were the striped suit and they had insignia on their clothing. We were told what the insignia meant, that a green triangle meant a criminal, that a red triangle meant a political prisoner.
Q On the basis of these agreements and discussions which you have described, Dr. Ruff, the low pressure chamber, I believe it was in February, 1942, I believe was sent from Berlin to Dachau, who gave the order for this?
A Well the DVL, the German Research Association, for Aviation I gave the order for this transport. I asked the motor pool to give us a driver for the transport of the chamber.
Q Did the low pressure chamber go directly from Berlin to Dachau or was it first sent to Munich?
A Since the transport of the low pressure chamber was on the autobahn the chamber was first sent to Munich and since this was a Luftwaffe vehicle, it was to be turned over to a member of the Luftwaffe. Rascher was not in Dachau at this time. He was in Munich or in Schongau If the driver had gobe directly from Berlin to Dachau they might have arrived at an inconvenient time, perhaps in the evening ,and would have had to find some responsible person to whom they could give the keys and the papers. They could not go into the camp proper since they had to have passes issued to them personally for that purpose which could not be issued by the Camp Commandant at Dachau but only by the Reichsfuehrer SS. In the discussion of all of these minor questions, when we visited the camp Commandant at Dachau he finally asked us whether the driver knew at all what kind of experiments were going to be carried out, and we said, of course, no, and then he said he wished that the chamber would be turned ever to Rascher in Munich, since otherwise the drivers might spread rumors that inmates of the concentration camps were being selected for service in the Luftwaffe.
For that reason the chamber went first to Munich and was turned over to Professor Weltz there and he turned it over to Rascher.
Q Witness, you once signed an affidavit, 18 October, 1946, which is in document book 2 on page 46, document 437, exhibit 42. In this affidavit your statements were formulated to this effect and I quote " That is the low pressure chamber was taken to Dachau, I beg you pardon, it was taken to Munich, instead of directly to Dachau, so that the drivers would not find out what the final destination was."
Is this statement as it is formulated here, connected with what you have just described, the order of the Commandant at Dachau?
A I have already said that in order to avoid rumors to the effect that concentration camp inmates were already being selected for the German Luftwaffe, the camp Commandant demanded that the chamber be turned over in Munich.
Q This low pressure chamber came to Munich overland and then to Dachau, who ten issued the travel orders for this trip and who supplied the fuel?
A The travel orders for this trip, since it was a military vehicle were given by a military authority at our airfield. The DVL, the experimental station for aviation, as a civilian agency, could not issue such orders and give such approval. The luftwaffe agency at the air field filled out the travel orders after consulting the medical inspectorate, that is Hippke, since at this time it was already extremely difficult to get approval for such a long trip for which Diesel oil was necessary as fuel. Diesel oil was almost exclusively reserved for submarines and I believe this trip of the low pressure chamber under it's own power was, as far as I can recall, the last major trip of such low pressure chamber under it's own power. Later it had to be taken by railroad. 6550 Q Then later did you discuss anything with any one about the quality of the experimental subjects, or was nothing more said about that?
A The statement about the quality of the experimental subjects, that is that they would be professional criminals, that they would be allowed to volunteer, and that they would get some reward of some sort for participation in the experiments, was give first by Professor Weltz, and second, confirmed by Hippke, and, third by Rascher, and fourth, by the Camp Commandant.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess until onethirty.
( The Tribunal adjourned for the noon recess)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 28 April 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. SIEGRFIED RUFF Resumed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. FRITZ SAUTER (Counsel for the defendant Ruff):
Q. Before the recess you told us what you know before the Dachau experiments about the experimental subjects, whether they were voluntary, whether they were criminals, whether they received rewards. I should like to know whether similar indications were made to you about the quality of the experimental subjects while the experiments were continuing, that is, after they had already started.
A. Yes, also after the beginning of the experiments these factors were confirmed to me. when Romberg came from Dachau to Berlin for the first time and reported to me about the experiments, we naturally discussed the question what experimental subjects were placed at our disposal, and on this occasion Romberg confirmed to me that they were placed at our disposal, and on this occasion Romberg confirmed to me that they were all voluntary, and that we were there concerned with criminals.
DR. FRITZ SAUTER: Mr. President, I had intended to quote two testimonies of witnesses, the testimony of SS-Obergruppen-Fuehrer Wolff, who has been mentioned here repeatedly, and also the testimony of Professor Doctor Hippke, who also was mentioned on numerous occasions. Originally I intended considering the importance of their testimony, to hear them personally on the witness stand. In the meantime, however these two witnesses were already heard orally in the Milch Tribunal downstairs and were cross examined subsequently. For that reason, I decided not to examine these witnesses here. If we would examine these two witnesses here it would cost us approximately 4 days, for that is exactly the length of time they tood downstairs.
Therefore, I should merely like to quote excerpts from their testimony. I am not going to do that today because the supplemental document book in which these two testimonies are contained is not yet available to you. By tomorrow morning this supplemental book will be available to you and then I shall be in a position to read excerpts from these two testimonies.
MR. HARDY: Your honors, I don't know whether defense counsel knows tho procedure necessary, for the introduction of the testimony before the Tribunal Number II will only necessitate him receiving a copy of the record and having the record certified to by the Secretary General of that Tribunal, and then to request the Tribunal here to take judicial notice thereof. And by doing so, I don't see the reason or necessity for reading into the record here the testimony before Tribunal Number II. It may be done that simply. I don't know whether he is aware of that or not.
DR. FRITZ SAUTER: Mr. President, I have already stated that I am not going to read this long record in verbatim, but shall only quote a few excerpts which appear to be of particular importance. I am doing that in the interest of brevity of the proceedings and for the same reason I forwent the opportunity to examine these witnesses personally because that would have cost us approximately four days. The prosecution probably would not be able to get any more from those two witnesses in their cross examination than was the case downstairs in tho Milch Tribunal. What I suggested now is intended to accelerate proceedings.
MR. HARDY: Your honor, I agree with Dr. Sauter 100%. I am merely trying to inform him that to have it certified to by the Secretary of that Tribunal will not delay us here when ho introduces it tomorrow.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the prosecuting attorney is correct if the Secretary-General will certify the entire testimony- of these two witnesses, this Tribunal will take judicial notice of that testimony.
It is then available before this Tribunal for both parties and can be referred to in argument. It will then be noted by the tribunal in its entirety and counsel may call attention in argument and in his brief to those portions which he deems important to his defense. Of course, the evidence is already in the transcript form. The Secretary-General will just certify that so many pages of the mimeographed transcript as to the testimony of those witnesses before Tribunal II in that testimony is before this Tribunal for judicial notice, and the Tribunal will take judicial notice of that testimony. "It seems to me that would accomplish very purpose that counsel for the defendant Ruff, and the other defendants whose defense will be put in next, that that would answer every purpose that the defendants could desire.
DR. FRITZ SAUTER: Thank you, Mr. President. I am in full agreement with you. " In that connection I should like to read an excerpt from an affidavit by Herbert Wilschewske which can be found in Document Book Ruff, Document No. 11 on page 45, and which was already submitted to the IMT during the case against the SS. This document will receive the exhibit number 10. This Herbert Wilschewske from whom this affidavit originates was a Polish Communist. He went to Dachau Concentration Camp after having been sentenced previously to eight years penitentiary because of refusal to undergo military service. The first part of that affidavit is not important and I ask you merely to take notice of it.
DR. SAUTER (Continuing) He here speaks about housing and treatment he received in Dachau and he said he was well treated and quite satisfied. I should only like to read the two small paragraphs at the end of the affidavit. I would like to read them because they refer to experiments. The one but the last paragraph, page 47 of the German edition of the document, reads:
"During the whole of my stay in Dachau I saw no instance of killing or maltreating of prisoners, with the exception of the "youth education" measures ordered by the Reichsfuehrer-SS; these were corporal punishment. All cases of execution of shooting or hanging, of which I heard, were based on court-martial verdicts.
"I have never actually seen conditions like those I saw in films and read about in the newspapers after the capitulation, about maltreatment in the German concentration camps. I knew, certainly, about medical experiments on prisoners. I had repeated opportunities of speaking to prisoners who had presented themselves for these experiments. I know nothing of the nature of these experiments. Prisoners who reported for those experiments, did so, as far as I know, voluntarily, as in this way they could earn their own freedom and rehabilitation as well as benefiting their dependents......"
This affidavit is certified in the proper way as I said before. It originates from a Polish Communist who was interned at Dachau for a number of years. Dr. Ruff, the experiments in Dachau then began. What order did you have which permitted you to send your co-workers to Dachau, including Dr. Romberg?
A. Dr. Romberg received the order to clarify the question whether a protection of airplane passengers is possible at a height of 20 kilometers altitude. For that purpose he was to carry out certain parachute experiments. By parachute experiments we understand experiments where a man who has jumped from the plane would fall as if he wasn't opening his parachute.
Under so-called slow sinking experiments we understand experiments which are similar to conditions where a man goes down to the ground when his parachute is opened. During those experiments Romberg was to pay attention to the so-called pre-mobilisation which is the peculiar incident where the human being when descending from high altitude regains his full consciousness at the point where when ascending he lost his consciousness. In the case of this assignment with which Romberg went to Dachau we were concerned with a very clearly limited order to clarify a practical and important question.
Q. Dr. Ruff, during this trial we are always speaking of medical experiments on human beings. In other words, medical experiments on human beings. I would be very interested to know whether this experiments, the experiment in an airplane, or experiments with the low pressure chamber in order to protect people from high altitude can be put on the same level as medical experiments, such as infectious experiments, etc., or wasn't there any basical difference which could find the effect in the legal evaluation of these experiments?
A. If you like you could divide medical experiments into two main groups. On the one hand you have the actual clinical experiments to which, for instance, belong infection experiments. In the case of these clinical experiments the man in charge of the experiment is not really close to the actual course of the experiments or, at any rate to a very small extent. The physiological experiment on the other hand to which these aviation experiments belong have an entirely different task. They are performed on healthy persons, do not bring about any illness and normally result in no damage to health of the person or even in the death of the experimental subject. It is their task to investigate the normal physiological living conditions or to test the regulations governing these conditions. In order to cite a very simple example one can find out what the reaction of the heart is under normal conditions for instance, how the heart reacts when standing, when lying, after easy work, etc.
In order to stick to this example one can also try to ascertain to what extent the heart can be burdened with, for instance, physical activity. For such a purpose I ask that the experimental subjects carry out physical exercise up to the time of exhaustion. Daring that time I observe all the things which are of particular interest to me. During such burdening experiments, as we call it in medicine, practical questions often play a particular part. In order to stay with this example of the function of the heart the practical questions which will crop up, for instance, are the following: to What extent can a human being, given certain nourishment and assuming a certain age, be burdened. In our experiments as we carried them out in Dachau it was to be ascertained whether this burdening, by having a person parachute from high altitude, remained within normal reactions of a human being and the practical question is whether the human person would awaken from its altitude sickness early enough to carry out his decision to unfold the parachute entirely. It is important that in this group of physiological experiments can increase this burdening by degrees so that one carefully approaches the limitations of possibility. The entire experiment is carried out within the sphere of normal. Contrary to the clinical experiments, for instance, infection experiments which are always carried out in the sphere of the abnormal.
Q. Dr. Ruff, I should like to revert to the one but last question I put to you. I have just heard it was translated that Romberg had the order to clarify this problem at a height of 25000 motors. Didn't I understand you to say that is order read that the problem was to be clarified at a height of 20000 meters?
A. Yes, that is correct. I said 20,000 meters.
Q. Dr. Ruff, one day the experiments were started at Dachau;
Were you yourself in Dachau during those experiments and did you personally convince yourself how these experiments were carried out, or was that not the case?
A. That is correct. at one time I went to Dachau while these experiments were carried on and I observed them.
Q. Do you know when, approximately, that was.
A. Yes, that was during the first weeks of these experiments. Unfortunately I can no longer give you the exact date.
Q. Can you tell us approximately how long after the beginning of the experiments you went there, whether one week, 14 days or a month later.
A. I assume about three weeks later. I went there about three weeks after the beginning of the experiments but as I said I can't say exactly.
Q. I fully understand. During your personal experience in Dachau when you observed these experiments for the first and last time, did you also see the inmates used for these purposes.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you speak to these people, I mean the inmates?
A. Yes. I did before and after the experiments I spoke to those inmates who participated in the experiments which I personally saw. And, in addition I had time, from five to six hours, to move among these prisoners, that were used for the experiments and talked to them about various matters.
Q Dr. Ruff, did these persons wear any particular red or a green badge, and I mean the prisoners who you saw when you went to Dachau? During the experiments when you yourself were there did the experimental subjects wear any badge? Did that come to your notice?
A The experimental subjects which were used for our experiments were housed together at that experimental station. They all wore a badge which was the same in the case of all them. It was the green badge belonging to the criminal.
Q Did you find, out, through conversation, for what crimes these people had been incarcerated?
A Romberg, as well as Rascher, told me about the crimes that were committed by these persons, and I think that the witness Neff, who was examined here, said something about that. Today I only remember the case of two of these experimental subjects of whom one was sentenced because of theft and the other because of printing false money.
Q You said that the inmates who you saw wore the green badgethe badge for professional criminals. Weren't there any political prisoners there who ordinarily would have had the red badge?
A These experimental subjects I saw all wore the same badge; namely, the green square.
Q Dr. Ruff, did you entertain any thoughts when you were in Dachau as to whether people who you saw there were Germans or foreigners? Whether they were Aryans or Jews? Whether they were civilians or prisoners of war? I am not asking you whether you are thinking about that today, but whether you thought about that at that time or whether you learned something about it? I emphasize - at that time.
A At that time I did not think about that point. That for the reason that I did not know that any foreigners were housed in any concentration camps, not to speak of prisoners of war. That I only heard here during the trial - that there were any prisoners of war in Dachau or in any concentration camps. I cannot remember having read, in the newspaper before this trial that any prisoners of war were in concentration camps.
From the conversation I had with the inmates during my stay in Dachau I can say today, with certainty, that none of these inmates spoke any other language but German. Certainly, there was no experimental subject there who came from abroad, and if I remember correctly, Neff, has also testified that these foreigners did not wear the badge of a professional criminal.
Q During conversations with these people did you discuss the question of the voluntary nature? If you didn't discuss that question expressly, what impression did you gain from these people as to that aspect?
A I didn't discuss the question of their voluntary nature specifically because I had already known before the experiments started that we were going to use voluntary subjects. My co-worker, Romberg, on the occasion of his first trip to Berlin, told me that they would be voluntary professional criminals and I therefore had no occasion to discuss that question with them. However, I asked one of these people since I was interested in that subject - how many had volunteered or rather, how many had reported for these experiments, and he said that this was a number of sixty-seven and that Stabsarzt Rascher had ten selected, the age groups which were suitable for our experiments.
Q Witness, as you have said, you went to Dachau once after the experiments has started. You observed them yourself and convinced yourself of their execution. Why did you do that? Could you not rely upon your co-worker, Dr. Romberg, and if so, why did you go from Berlin to Munich in order to observe the experiments?
A Dr. Romberg was my oldest collaborator. Ever since January, 1938, he was a member of my institute and had engaged in particular in medical questions occurring during air accidents and during altitude accidents. By order of the Medical incorporate cf the Luftwaffe, he investigated all air incidents - air accidents during the years from 1938 to 1940, and he compiled a very extensive report on these matters where he established that during aviation, air incidents occur for the reason that crews were not informed enough about the peculiarities of altitude sickness.
On the basis of that report it was ordered that all crews of airplanes who had to fly in high altitudes had to be subjected once every two years to altitude sickness in order, by own experience and by observing their friends, they would get acquainted with altitude sickness. Rombert had performed numerous experiments of various nature upon himself in this sphere of high altitude. Within my institute it was his task to inform younger collaborators about altitude sickness. In other words, he had to teach our younger assistants and, in this manner, he had to perform high altitude experiments almost every day on either as the man in charge of the experiments or as the experimental subject. During all these experiments I had considered Romberg as a careful and reliable experimenter and physician. In spite of that, however, I went to Dachau personally in order to observe these experiments personally. Whenever any experiments were carried out outside our institute I was in the habit of doing that and I am referring to wind tunnel experiments at Braunschweig and other experiments at Rechlin. This visit to Dachau had nothing at all to do with my evaluation of the reliability of Dr. Romberg, but it was in accordance with a principle to which I always adhered whenever experiments were carried out beyond the limits of our institute.
Q Then the experiments at Dachau, Dr. Ruff, were not performed by yourself, but by the co-defendant, Dr. Romberg, and by the repeatedly mentioned Dr. Rascher. What was the relation of subordination? Was Dr. Romberg subordinate to Dr. Rascher during those experiments, or was Dr. Rascher subordinate to Dr. Romberg? Was this question of subordination ever discussed or, at any rate, what was year understanding?
A During those experiments we were concerned with scientific collaboration. This had been agreed upon. This, in effect, means that neither one was subordinate to the other. This scientific collaboration between the representatives of various institutes is quite customary in science. Dr. Romberg was responsible for the scientific part of these high altitude experiments because he was the one who had already in the past carried out such experiments.
He was the one who set up the experimental plan and had most experience in that regard. Within the concentration camp, the relations of subordination was different because Rascher had had the approval for the performance of these experiments and therefore was responsible to Himmler. Romberg, on the other hand, within the camp was responsible to the camp commander and to the SS legal system. That was no special case, but every person who had entered the concentration camp had to acknowledge this fact by his signature before given the permission to enter the camp. I had to sign such a paper when visiting the camp. Every person had to obey all the orders by the SS, while in the camp, and certainly had no right what so ever to issue within the camp. Dr. Ruff, in various documents contained in the document Volume #2 of the prosecution the expression can be found that Rascher was detailed to the DVL station at Dachau, DVL meaning German experimental Institute for Aviation. For instance, I found that expression contained in a file notice of Mrs. Rascher, dated the 28th April, 1942, Document 264, and also in a letter by the witness Wolf, directed to Hippke, addressed to the 16th of April, 1942, Document # 318. On the other hand, Heppke told me personally that there was no branch in Dachau of the D V. How about that situation?
A I did not at all concern myself about Rascher's being detailed to these experiments, either before the experiments or during the experiments. Rascher did not belong to my institute, and his being detailed, therefore, could not concern me. When the experiments started, Rascher had belonged to the institute of Prof. Weltz which had an Air Force agency, and if, as I see from the documents, there were differences between Weltz and Rascher, Rascher tried to be detailed to some other agency. In this connection, his wife suggested that he be detailed to the DVL at Dachau. No such branch over existed. At no time was there a branch of the DVL at Dachau or in any other concentration camp.
In the year 1942 there was no branch of the DVL at all, with the exception of an institute for seaplanes, which was located at Hamburg. Rascher, before the experiments and during the experiments when he was in Berlin, was not even detailed to my institute there. My institute was a civilian agency to which he could not possibly have been detailed.
Whenever any soldier or officer was to work with us temporarily as a guest this fact always presented particular difficulties. He was then detailed to an Air Force agency, and this agency in turn permitted him to work with us as a guest. Otherwise, a detailing to a branch at Dachau was not possible for two reasons; one reason because no such branch existed, and, secondly, that if my such branch existed it would have been a civilian agency.
In addition, if any such detailing had been carried out, DVL would have had to have been informed, and this report would have been sent back automatically by our personnel department containing the indication that any such detailing was not possible from a military point of view.
In Hippke's letter of reply to Wolff, which refers to the suggestion of the detailing of Rascher to Dachau, you find that Hippke does not agree to that suggestion; but, rather, writes that Luftgau VII (Air Gau VII) would carry out this request.
Q Dr. Ruff, when did you gain knowledge that Dr. Rascher's work with Prof. Weltz had been terminated, and that Rascher was once more part of his unit, which was then located at Schongau. When was that? Can you tell us approximately?
A When I was at Dachau at that time I heard there were certain differences with Weltz and Rascher, and that Rascher had been detailed away from that institute or was to be sent away. Since this concerned internal affairs of the institute I did not worry about it.
Q Witness, there is a certain contradiction to be found in the documents which are available here. The witness Neff who was examined here has stated on the 17th of December that he know with certainty that you were in Dachau once in order to look at these experiments. He said that was on the 22nd of February, 1942, the day of his birthday. Dr. Romberg, your co-workers, has made an affidavit, Exhibit 40, Document 476, wherein he states in paragraph five, and I quote: "I, Dr. Romberg, remember that Dr. Ruff at least visited Dachau twice, on which occasion he observed the experiments."
How often were you really in Dachau in order to look at the experiments?
A For the purpose of observing the experiments I went to Dachau once. In spite of that fact, however, both testimonies are correct when Heff says that he saw me in Dachau on one occasion when I looked at the experiments; and Romberg is also correct when he says that I was at Dachau on two occasions.
On one occasion I was there before the beginning of the experiment in order to discuss them; and on the second time I was there while these experiments were going on.
Q Dr. Ruff, at the time you were in Dachau in order to attend the experiments personally - that was approximately at the beginning of March, 1942 - what did Dr. Romberg and Dr. Rascher report to you about the progress up to that time? Were you told that the experiments had been going on according to program and without any incidents? Or were you told that there were any incidents?
A While I was in Dachau at that time Dr. Rascher and Dr. Romberg told me what experiments they had performed. They said that the experiments had been going on properly and they didn't tell me about any incidents which may have occurred.
Q You said before that on that occasion you observed the experiments at Dachau. You discussed various matters with the experimental subjects. Did you perhaps also speak to the experimental subjects, asking them whether they knew anything of incidents which occurred, or whether any damages to their health resulted during the course of the experiments?
A Naturally, I did not ask the experimental subjects about these matters; I only asked the people in charge of the experiments. I asked the experimental subjects only how they felt after the experiments, etc. They confirmed what I saw with my own eyes, namely, that apart from a certain tiredness alter the experiments, they suffered no complaints whatsoever.
Q while you were personally present in Dachau, what did you learn or what could you establish about the amount of the experimental subjects, and whether the same subjects were used for the experiments, or whether they changed in the case of the respective experiments? Dr. Romberg's experiments didn't only take place for a few days, but extended over a period of several weeks; what did you learn about that? What was the amount? Were they the same ones or did they change?
A I already said that a group of experimental subjects was housed at this experimental station. It was planned from the outset and it was in effect carried through that these experimental persons were to be available for the entire series. The amount of these experimental subjects ranged between ten to fifteen persons.
Q Dr. Ruff, we know today on the basis of the documents which have been submitted that during the Dachau highaltitude experiments - and I am speaking quite generally fatalities occurred. When and in what manner did you for the first time hear about these fatalities?
A That was approximately at the end of April, or the beginning of May. Dr. Romberg came to Berlin and reported to me that Rascher, in addition to our experiments for the purpose of protecting the people from high altitudes, was performing other experiments, as he said, upon orders of Himmler; and that one fatality occurred during those experiments of Rascher. Rascher, as Romberg reported to me, was carrying out an investigation about the reaction of the heart during the so-called "pressure illness."
Q What kind of an illness is that?
A That is aero-embolism.